The Andrew Baker - Graham Evans Investigation:The Second Reprisal

Dr Michael Cole formed the opinion that being found ‘Unsatisfactory’ by Professor William Tarnow Mordi and Professor Peter Illingworth in the 2004 Staff appraisal and performance improvement plan were reprisals (bullying) aimed to silence his whistleblowing about Professor Tarnow Mordi’s lack of medical competence and resulting harm to babies in the neonatal unit at Westmead Hospital.

Dr Cole believed that the inappropriate use of the performance appraisal process to negatively target him was an “unreasonable administrative sanction”and was therefore a reprisal and bullying.

In March 2005 Dr Cole wrote to both Tarnow Mordi and Illingworth informing them that he found their behaviour threatening and intimidating (bullying). Dr Cole also documented his concern that they had not acted on information documenting actual harm to babies in the neonatal unit, had not acted appropriately on information that some consultants were not contactable or available when on-call after hours for the care of babies, and that some consultants felt that they were being encouraged by Tarnow Mordi to bill patients in a manner that the consultants felt was fraudulent.

· That no feedback about the other concerns in the letters would be provided (the Baker- Evans Report).

Dr Gordon refused to discuss this misrepresentation. Dr Cole had obviously been found unsatisfactory. He remained of the opinion that the staff appraisal process had been used as a bullying exercise to silence him.

Dr Gordon did not reply to questions about this and the other issues put to her by ASMOF the union representing Dr Cole.

Dr Cole has never been shown or given a right of reply to the Baker-Evans report though it has been used against him in subsequent findings, investigations and proceedings.

In Dr Cole’s opinion the Andrew Baker - Graham Evans report was a whitewash. It appeared not to address the documented harm being done to babies in the neonatal unit or Professor Tarnow Mordi’s lack of clinical competence. Dr Cole believed it was obvious that he was targeted by Tarnow Mordi and his supporters.

Professor Tarnow Mordi agreed in writing that he could not document a single case in which Dr Cole had changed other consultant’s management unnecessarily. The Baker-Evans report did not address the fact that Tarnow Mordi had agreed that this complaint was manufactured and untrue. On the contrary this allegation was frequently remade (untruthfully) at subsequent disciplinary investigations as though it was an established fact and was fed to Tudehope and Bredemyer in 2008 when they reviewed clinical competence in the unit.

There was still no complaint to warrant Dr Cole being placed on a performance management plan (PIP). A performance management plan should properly follow a valid complaint. On this occasion Dr Cole opines that Baker, Tarnow Mordi, Karnaghan and other managers first decided to impose a performance management plan (to target him) and then Tarnow Mordi was tasked to find a suitable complaint.